Love is not defined by anybody else

One question I included within my project was, "do you have a brother or sister?" I didn't realize immediately that by having the One-Child Policy in China, you obviously do not have any siblings, cousins, aunts, uncles... etc. It kinda hit home! Greater than nature, this earth, school, and work, my family is the most significant aspect to my being. I don't know what i would do in this world if i didn't have a family to share it with. I guess I never realized how lucky Americans really are. People always say we're not free, when we are. Right now, we could be in China without families, dying and fighting to have our lives back to normal like they were 32 years ago! I cannot imagine a life without hope, love, and faith, and that is all that my family gives me each and every day. People do not respect themselves or their family members enough until it is too late. Why is it that Americans treat the people they love most the worst? This is just like the saying "don't wait until it's too late," or "you never know what you have until it's gone." In China, they know what they have all the time, because at any given second them or their own spawn could be dead without notice. Americans need to work on themselves and focus on how our lives are here and now. In order to obtain and contain happiness throughout our time, we need to learn to respect and appreciate each other. Not even just in regards to family, some people refer to friends as family. I know for myself, my family took in my best friend of 8 years only 3 years ago because she came from a broken home. Hallie is my sister, no less than that. The American government and societal members cannot put a label on love, in any country. Love is defined by what we make of it and how we appeal to it, and it's honestly nobody else's God damn business how you go about it or how you spend your time on this earth. Remember that...

my final reflection of the class

Being that this is my 3rd class with Dr. Morris, there is always something new, different, and interesting to learn about. Every semester something that I have observed is that classroom environment is vital to learning within her classroom settings. Rhetoric of Literature is a class that escapes the typical “norms” of other classroom environments. It is a class based on discussion and participation; if you do not have that, what do you have then? Luckily, for the third semester, I believe that Dr. Morris lucked out with a good crop of students. I did not necessarily have a specific reading that I liked best as much as an author. Henry David Thoreau struck me as the most fascinating author read about in class. Personally, I think everyone should have to study Thoreau at least once in their school career. To be honest, the sociologists and many theorists read about from the Rhetoric textbook did not interest me much, but if the class did not have those theorists to reflect off of, it would not be able to be relatable to anything. Thoreau was an author that any person could appreciate at any given time. He wrote things such as the book Walden and his infamous essay, Civil Disobedience. He is known for things such as being one of the few and first transcendentalists. Thoreau was essentially an advocate for nature and survival methods needed for hostile conditions and natural happenings. Indifferent from other authors, he did not appear to be a “dreamer” as much as he came across as a man who had objective thoughts in a subjective state of mind. When saying that I mean that he thought of things that could potentially happen, especially if society forgets that we live in a constantly changing environment. I never quite got the “pushing/persuading” vibe from him as an author. Thoreau was a natural writer, just like he was a natural thinker. Rhetoric of Literature was fulfilled with many similar topics day after day. I did not care for the quizzes, though I understand the purpose of having them. If to keep the quizzes idea, I would change the style of the quick to multiple choice or true or false. Short answer does reflect connective ideals, but most people just wrote something to write something. Also, class discussion was constantly filled with the same ideals being presented over and over. Sometimes I wanted to scream “abortion” just so that the subject would have changed. This class never genuinely got “off topic,” which is odd. To narrow it down, class discussions were fulfilled with people saying things such as “people don’t appreciate or respect nature enough,” or “nature is overlooked.” If anything, I would enforce students to choose topics to follow throughout the course of the semester, just as we did in Advanced Composition. This way, future presentations won’t just be about students standing in front of the class presenting what they read and what we think of it. That got old, real quick. I always like the blogs though; they came in handy for a good vent session. I don’t think it matters what class Dr. Morris ever teaches, she is a phenomenal and passionate educator.

Undies on a Line

What do people really see when they look outside there windows? I see trees, grass, rain, walkways, cars, lights, buses, people. I always wonder why people think of such little things that they see from nature. When i look outside, I don't want to see the negative things that life can bring. This world is too large to consume so little imagination. One friend of mine created an art project and wanted to display it somewhere out in the public of nature. Almost everywhere across campus, they made him take it down. What he made was a giant pair of underwear. They were about 7 feet tall and 5 feet wide whitey-tighties. He attached them to a string and hung them from one window of my dorm to another window on another floor. As soon as it was seen hanging, public safety called to make him take it down. What is so wrong with displaying our creativity within nature? People don't appreciate the little things within nature anymore is because people are always destructing our ideas of what is right and what is fascinating. If I want to hang a fake pair of huge underwear in public, who are you to tell me to take it down? I almost forget sometimes that this is a free country...

Just thought that people should see how powerful forced abortion is within China: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_CYuWBozcU

I think one thing I wanted to touch base on about this class and about the content of nature. Contextually, the books we use to read about nature within class have a objective purpose yet delineates itself subjectively. Many of the authors that were seen within American Earth are kinda up in the clouds, if you will. When I read a majority of the short stories, addresses, and formal papers from that book, sometimes I just wanted to say "what the hell." By no means am I saying that I disagree with some of the messages delivered from American Earth; it was just that some of the messages combined too many facts with their stronger opinions. You see, I believe that Thoreau balanced out facts and opinions well. He is a deserving writer to follow, in my opinion. I enjoy authors who have a subtle opinion backed up by unknown truths. It is hard to hear anything "new" or relevant in this day and age anymore, because I mean- we have technology, nothing is unknown. The next books that this society will make will be about technology and what we discovered through appreciating technology rather than nature. I understand why we read what we read in class, because nature is still prevalent within society and is greatly overlooked especially due to technology. Though, I feel as if what we read became redundant. If some of you hadn't noticed, our class discussions became less and less as the semester went on. It almost became more forcible to get people to talk and state opinions. I feel as if this was the case because the class kept repeating their ideals and opinions. You know, I totally respect your decisions as an American free human being- but some needed to stop preaching about vegan-ism and vegetarianism in relation to every single thing we read or talked about. A life choice is a life choice, just like the decision to eat meat and to litter. Not one person could address another person and exactly tell them what they do in their life is wrong, immoral- yes, wrong- no. I was waiting for the day that somebody asked me why I ate meat and didn't respect meat because it is a part of nature. If that day would have happened, I would have pulled out my invisible book of laws on meat and called it a day. Also, the stories read began to intertwine and almost sounded TOO similar. It was driving me crazy. Something I would consider changing for this class in the future is to have students pick a topic to follow throughout the course (just like in Advanced Comp) and stick to that topic only. This goes along with the presentations. They were too redundant. Standing in front of the classroom lecturing us about something from the book and showing us pictures to me is not an adequate way to go about learning. I think that presenters should have to create something engaging and mix up the norm. Just sayin'.

Poor Little Monsters

To get off of the topic of Chinese babies for one blog, let's talk about American babies. This blog is geared to help inform Americans about the difference between our government and the Chinese Communists. When typing in "American babies" into Google what comes up is quite annoying: baby magazines, baby photo contests, an American baby FACEBOOK? But what defines an American baby? Our country is the largest integrated country in the world, yet we still put the fair skinned child as the face of this country. Better yet, when I typed in "Chinese babies" into Google, what came up was as followed: "Do they eat babies in China?" "Babies for sale," "Dead babies found," "How Chinese babies pay the price for China's overpopulation," and over 5 links for "Chinese baby adoption." Being that Google is an American based website, it is quite sad to see that our focus within journals, magazines, newspapers, and books have a negative connotation in relation to Chinese babies. One of the articles that came up under "Chinese babies" was about tainted formula being put into the children's milk in China. A sample of the contaminant was found from over 20 companies across China. The substance showed to be Melamine. Melamine resulted in sickening over 6,000 babies and killing 3 infants. The Chinese Health Minister Gao Qiang's job was to thoroughly inspect these companies for any signs or type of contaminate. After detectives were able to inspect Gao Qiang and his former colleagues, detectives arrested him and over 20 others. Apparently these men were purposely poisoning these children. None of the article I read had said why, but from my guess it is because of the One-Child Policy. All of those in which were arrested were all male. Most of these men were married without children. My guess is that they figured out a clever way to help diminish the overpopulation problem. Well, what they thought would be inconspicuous was definitely stupidity.

Communism Timeline

Since the American government has such a huge impact on the African culture, why can't they say ANYTHING about the Chinese culture? Oh yeah, Africa's government is pointless while Chinese government are communists. If you want my opinion Mr. Blog, I would say that the blame for their communist government is Mao Zedong. Mao Zedong is the man who formed the Communist Party of China in 1949 (even thought communism was widely practiced since 1921, it was never official). He claimed that there was not enough form or structure within the Chinese government. Immediately after the declaration, China entered the Korean War. Events started building up year after year because of Zedong; because of him, the Chinese experienced the Great Leap Forward policy, widespread hunger as a result of the Great Leap Forward policy, the Cultural Revolution, the Red Guards taking control of the local government, and him finally dying. As the years go on, the Chinese struggle with the fight for independence because their government officials only become more and more asinine. In 1994 China was criticized for human rights abuses and lost the bid to host the Year 2000 Olympics. Obviously China has more going on than the One-Child Policy, but the OCP is the most outstanding problem within their country, yet the most overlooked problem in their country. Even during my research, it is next to impossible to find any information in regards to when this policy came about, who started it, and why it was started (other than overpopulation means). This is how overlooked the One-Child Policy is and how desperately it needs to be reformed. Americans could do a better job at at least making it known within our society.

Adoption of Chinese Babies in the US

WARNING: THE PHOTO POSTED IS DISTURBING, BUT IT IS REALIt is becoming more and more prevalent that couples in the United States are adopting babies from Asia, China specifically. The one-child policy is more currently known as "China's war on women." A very disturbing quote derived from a Chinese official stated that "the one-child policy has prevented 300 million births, the equivalent of the population of Europe." China's abortion rate is astronomical, just like their suicide rate. What people may not know is that in China they have FORCED abortions, not so much as chosen abortions. Women have literally been 7 months pregnant and pulled off of the streets of China and forced into a room and had their own child ripped out of them fully developed by a medical practitioner. These medical examiners are murderers and deserve to be ripped off the streets and brutally beaten to death. Who enforces these rules? Where is the justice in this and how is this policy fair to the unborn child. Listen, we get the point that China is one of the most populous countries on earth, but do not kill a fetus or a fully developed baby just because these women do not have a birth permit and it is "illegal to be pregnant." If this was a policy in American, most teenagers would be mutilated and some dead. The forced abortions are literally killing many Chinese women and are killing their sense of being. What I don't understand is that the United states is one of the more significant countries that hold the most populous amount of "imported" Chinese babies. If it is so illegal to be pregnant in China, send those kids to countries where it is not. Why is it that American has so many imported Chinese babies, yet their mothers want them and it is mostly illegal to carry a child. That child must be extremely lucky to travel 30 hours to a family in need. I understand that the US government is desperately trying to help countries such as Africa, yet it is LEGAL to have children there. In China, women are being mutilated and killed based on an "unworthy" and "illegal" pregnancy. Isn't this some form of invasion of privacy? How is this not unjust and criminal? Why is this being so God damn overlooked???

The photo of the woman staring down at her dead baby in a bag is a real photo. This Chinese woman was ripped off of the street when she was 7 months pregnant and forced to go to a hospital where they forcibly killed her 7-month-old fetus. When the medical doctors told her she needed to pay them in order to rid of the body, she told them that she had no money. Therefore they left the baby in a bag aside of her bed for her to "deal with." These matters are too fucking overlooked. Is this seriously accepted and enforced? Fuck off Chinese government.

“Have Fewer Children Live Better Lives”

Many slogans about the one-child policy in China have hit the market since the late 1970s. To many, these slogans are "normal," but to people who live in say... American- they are offensive. For examples, many popular slogans consisted of saying: "China Needs Family Planning," "Late Marriage and Childbirth Are Worthy," “Have Fewer Children Live Better Lives,” and “Have Fewer, Better Children to Create Prosperity for the Next Generation.” ,These are just SOME of the ads that were displayed across the entire country of China once upon a time. In some parts of the country, many people can still see these faded signs and agreements. Though the fact of the matter that these signs are hardly displayed anymore, they are still noteworthy because it is still expected of parents to follows these harsh sayings. In particular, the slogan that states "China Needs Family Planning" came from a family that had two sons instead of one. Even to this day it is rare to see a family of 4, even if those two children are boys. Usually in China, if the mother gets pregnant for a second time and they find that the child is a boy, the doctors somewhat encourage them not to abort it primarily based on the fact that they are male and will only grow up to help their country succeed. When the 4-person family is seen in China it is almost never two daughters or a daughter and a son. But, if a daughter is born first and they try a second time for a boy and it turns out to be a boy, they will keep both. Anyways, these slogans are abrupt and offensive. How can somebody display the ideology of abortion, and how could one control a family that is not theirs? In China you can. This policy needs to be reformed.

What's the problem with girls?

In an article I read online about India's female foeticide... I was appauled! Foeticide (or feticide), is better known for "fetus homicide," or the killing of a fetus. After reading this article online... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-13421267, i I able to see the troubles that is going on in India's society. Just listen to this: India legally allows abortion up to 12 weeks of pregnancy. Gender can be determined only after 14 weeks of pregnancy and sex selective abortion is illegal. But medical practitioners have found a way of circumventing the law. Could you imagine having your child ripped out of you when they are nearly fully developed? In this specific article, a woman almost had her 4th daughter aborted based on the fact that she could not afford her and just because she was going to be her 4th girl, rather than her 4th CHILD. Due to this illegal ideology, India's government is offering books and uniform allowances when a girl reaches 9th grade. Such girls will even receive a free bike at that time as well. This is specifically aimed towards girls because people in India become "saddened when a girl is born." How could one look down upon the birth of a baby girl? Better yet, their culture and religious values force them to recreate/reproduce. How on earth will these various countries be able to reproduce if there are no girls left to do so!? Did they ever think of that! In India, the price of an abortion is equivalent to $110 in American money. Many states across America are making abortions illegal and considering abortions as "fetal homicide." Just as Indian government is trying to expand on. In America today, 38 countries have made abortion illegal and declared it to be murder and the act of homicide against an unborn child regardless of gender. Only 13 states in America consider abortion to still be legal, but it is only legal when dependent on the age of the fetus whether or not to terminate it. Personally, this is all disgusting- metaphorically and literally. If you can't deal with your baby, give it up for adoption. Someone in your country or elsewhere will want that baby, but they won't want it dead- male or female.

"You can't wake a person pretending to sleep."

The most interesting thing I read about was the article about 7 Billion people concerned with world resources in Nigeria and across the world. The article opens with a young woman who names her child "Enough" when a nurse looks down upon her interest in how many children she wishes to have. Though, this is not just a prevalent issue within Nigeria; the article later points out how this is a globe-wide issue. Basically, overpopulation is becoming a social and economic crisis within itself. It is fascinating to comprehend the fact that for every 955 girls, there are 1,000 boys born in the United States. The article continues to discuss how over-populated China is, being the most populous country in the world. Being that they are so overly populated, they insist on their "one-child policy" which I have discussed in past blog posts. Hopefully the US does not drop the bomb on us that we have to restrict ourselves to a certain amount of children. During the Tribal Natural Resources documentary, tells the story of the group of people who worked together in order to restore and fund tribal natural resources primarily in Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota. They had specific goals that included the help from students, faculty, and professionals to shape the actions of this 5 year long project. These people claim that there is an intense spiritual and religious connection that connects them to their land. Farmers are certainly trying to increase food supply. This documentary basically describes the experience of Native Americans reconnecting with their land and nature. Within Jason Clay's talk "How Big Brands can help biodiversity," I was able to see how biodiversity is an important global issue. Given the examples he describes, I was able to interpret the fact that biodiversity provides us with things that are essential and what we need to survive. It is astonishing to see that by 2050, we are going to have 9billion people and consume billions more than we do now. No matter how much we bring up productivity and efficiency, it will most likely never be enough. We need to practice "going green" in order to save the future of our store's shelves.

One Child?

Might I just say... there is a "One-Child policy" in China. It's no joke. Below is a real photo of a real family in China who is unhappy with this "law."

This man from the photo who is a farmer in Guangxi, was interviewed by the New York Times and in his interview he said told them, “Last year, I had a son, so now we can’t have any more. But the tradition here is big families and lots of sons. So no one is very happy.” Note that he said "lots of sons;" having many sons in the Chinese culture is respected more than having a daughter. In past and some present cultures, the father was/is allowed to kill his newborn daughter, if indeed they want a boy. The boy stands for pride and hard-work. Their culture believes that a boy will prove the family better off than a female. They think that a boy will be more intelligent and will hold a better job to prove how their family values education in China. Though, this policy is not fair and families do not agree with it. Do they have a right? Does America have a right to say "we should limit our births to 2 children per married couple?" If you will notice, people of Chinese descent are one of the largest immigrating cultures growing in the USA. I believe they may come here for have freedom and a family. Could you imagine your husband deciding to kill your newborn baby girl after suffering through labor for 9 months? They may too come to America to give their children equal rights in education and life standards. Brace yourself, this topic may disgust you: Describing the story of one Chinese immigrant in New York, Kirk Semple and Jeffrey E. Singer wrote in the New York Times, “When he was about 30 — old to be a bachelor by the standards of his village —Wang Jianhua married Lin Yaofang and they had a baby, a girl. When Ms. Lin became pregnant again, in violation of the country’s one-child policy, the authorities made her get an abortion, relatives and friends said. When word of her third pregnancy reached the government, he later told friends, officials went to their house to take Ms. Lin away, leading to Mr. Wang’s detention. [Source: Kirk Semple and Jeffrey E. Singer, New York Times, March 22, 2011]... That's true. Can you imagine our government FORCING someone to have an abortion in order to essentially save overpopulation? Just take a moment to ponder and picture living in this society in China and having to stress over having one perfect child and a little family.

OverWhat?

Even though I was unable to attend class on Thursday, I heard a lot about it. The main thing I heard about that class was about overpopulation. A major question lies here... who or what has control over overpopulation?

I found this photo interestingly accurate. As you can notice, the bird is marked with the word "resources" and he is carrying over a dozen babies. This bird is a metaphor for our society's resources slowly but surely breaking down due to overpopulation. Statistics are beginning to show the increase of teenage pregnancy out of wedlock being a leading factor for our country's overpopulation issue. It is said that by the year 2047, the high school drop out rate for teenage mothers is going to increase by nearly 60%. According to various online resources, "parenting" is owed mostly to non-married, single parents under the age of 25. That rate is greatly increasing. What is happening to our society? The idea of marriage and the value of "saving yourself until marriage" no longer stands as a moral. One may say that this is arguable, but let's be real... go into a classroom and ask the class to argue no sex before marriage, you may hear tons of laughing remarks. Also, you might want to ask students in a college classroom to raise their hand if they stand true to this effort, or better yet, ask those lovely kids in high school. It may not go over well. It is almost looked at as embarrassing in this day and age to still be a virgin before marriage. There is NO argument that open amounts of sex especially in teenage lives is a growing contributor to overpopulation, it's a fact. Government officials are losing their minds in trying to "fairly" distribute proper funding towards welfare in certain homes. What people need to realize more often is that some of these resources being mentioned have to deal with welfare and welfare is stemmed from "hard economic times." Well, pretty much EVERYONE is being effected by "hard economic times." Another resource is the fact that money from welfare is coming straight from our HARD-WORKING pockets. Resources are being killed due to overpopulation. Soon, that bird will be dead. Those babies might be too... if they're not treated correctly.

Emphasis on the... Huh?

I really enjoyed the class discussion on 10/4. When we were discussing how little do us large humans see the world. Better yet, a small creature such as an ant can be personified to view the world with his centipede-like eyeballs in a large manner. Stories or poems such as that shows us the relevance in portraying the world in a larger manner. There is truth in the ideal that humanity escapes the wonder or remorse towards our planet earth. Earth is remarkable and powerful and endures a sense of wonder due to the unknown. It is also ironic that something so minuscule and improbable would stir up such a controversy over our world's remarkableness. Little enough do we see the smallest aspects of this earth such as an ant or other insects, but better yet- they view our culture entirely. What amount of emphasis do humans place on the "real world?" Little to none at all. Relating back to my last post, people in today's society put major emphasis on technology. The use of technology could arguably be the source and cause as to why people, especially those in the most recent generation, are weakening their sensibility about nature. We are such a technology based culture in today's society that even the biggest natural disasters are forgotten. If you ask certain people what the Dust Bowl was, they may answer in "I don't know." This is common. Many people, especially young adults, do not understand the battle within nature that our ancestors and others had in trying to make our environment recognized and beautiful to be absorbed until current time. Their struggles in nature (i.e. the Dust Bowl) were their biggest challenges and successes in nature. People may not understand the empowering movement that that part of the country had to overcome in order to survive. We have it so lucky in this day. Materialistic things are placed on a higher standing than distinguishing the true beauty that surrounds us daily.

My Nature Poem that I Just Sent to SHOOFLY!

30 Minutes to Transcend Skies filling with white clouds Heavy air holding breaths ready to exhale Bright yellow star, challenging proud But which character will prevail? Then: Boom, Bang, Boom Thresholds of lightning interfere Why the sounds of sudden doom? Concentration is replaced by fear Bolts of hard light are near Making her freak She screams “oh dear!” Her naked feet are wet and weak; Attaching and detaching from earth below Embracing the cold, wrapped up in warm cotton snug; Oh, how a silent moment could turn so. At this time, the sky revoked its plug. A split second to rekindle her thoughts, And run from those rabid, white lights That the demons had brought. The sun ran and hid, transcending into night. From the other side of the hard gloss she saw Water that dampened her heart These trees become raw To nature, oxygen acts as art. Could she not feel the water thrown by God? Nature brings blessings that we recycle, but Some droplets feel as forceful as a rod Even if they come at her like a bullet Not in the sewer, nor back in the sky. Buckets that fill are full of pollution. What if evaporations go awry? Before we lose it all, there must be a solution.

Nature... is Subjective.

Okay- Let's be real. Is there really any true definition of nature? No. I've noticed how in class, the argument over nature more so derived from the dictionary definition. Well... let's understand that the people who write and edit the dictionary have a job to uphold and cannot put under Nature "subjective, does not have one true definition." So, let's not get mad at the poor dictionary people for doing their jobs. Though, let's look at the definition from dictionary.com and dissect it: "The phenomena of the physical world collectively, including plants, animals, the landscape, and other features and products of the earth, as opposed to humans or human creations." First of all... phenomena by definition means: "A fact or situation that is observed to exist or happen, esp. one whose cause is in question." or better yet "A remarkable person or thing." Therefore... nature by means of "phenomena" indirectly shows the subjective philosophy behind the meaning of nature. The focus in Rhetoric of Literature is the physical world and the environment, so let's not get off topic and call nature everything unrelated to the concrete environment outside our buildings and homes. Opposing the dictionary.com definition, the physical world does not just consist of plants, animals, and landscape. We must remember to understand that nature is the small things that may not meet human eye. From John Muir's A 1000 Mile Walk to the Gulf, he discuses how plants get recognized, but with uncertain sensation- whereas minerals where these plants came from are not acknowledged at all. This just goes to show how little society understand about nature. Also, the definition should not rule out the fact that humans and the idea of human creation are not appropriate to be described in a nature definition. Do we walk this earth and feed it's growth with our bare hands? Yes. People are the successors of the environment on this earth. Without humans, the earth would be one huge, untamed forest. Granted, we would all have higher oxygen levels and less asthmatic issues, but we would all also have to learn to act like Tarzan. The true definition of nature will never be disclosed, simply because there isn't one. This earth is remarkable. As explained from the word "phenomena," nature is a remarkable thing. And us being humans, we are remarkable in all that we do for nature. The only thing we should do more is sculpture our minds around the true essence of nature's beauty. Instead of walking to class with your head down texting, put your phone in your pocket- on silent- and listen to the wind blow, watch the sunset, watch the trees blow and leaves fall. That is the beauty of life. You're in this life, just shape your mind to the actuality of its presence surrounding you.